MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7162122197 · doi:10.82308/43033

Research in the domain of nocturnal home hemodialysis (NHD): long-term clinical outcomes of NHD patients compared to conventional hemodialysis (CHD) patients post-renal transplantation

2008· dissertation· en· W7162122197 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter Robert Pauly

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHemodialysisDialysisTransplantationIncidence (geometry)Kidney transplantationCohortRetrospective cohort studyRenal replacement therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nocturnal home hemodialysis (NHD) is a novel type of renal replacement therapy (RRT) whereby patients administer their own dialysis on 5 to 7 nights per week, each session lasting between 5 and 8 hours. NHD is known to effectively reverse and even normalize many of the physiological aberrations of uremia. However, at present, renal transplantation remains the gold standard RRT and NHD patients continue to be referred for transplantation. Unfortunately, on account of such small numbers of patients undergoing NHD worldwide, little is known about the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of NHD patients after kidney transplantation. It was hypothesized that the incidence of delayed graft function (DGF), patient and graft survival, and post-transplant estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), is better among conventional hemodialysis (CHD)-transplanted individuals than among those having received NHD. Of 231 past and current NHD patients in the Toronto NHD program, 36 underwent renal transplantation between January 1, 1994 and October 31, 2006. These 36 patients were matched to 68 transplanted CHD patients with a maximum follow-up of 11.7 years to test these hypotheses in the setting of a retrospective cohort study. The incidence of DGF was not significantly greater in the NHD group than in the CHD group [NHD: 15/35 (42.9%) vs. CHD: 25/68 (36.8%) p = 0.43] with an unadjusted OR of 1.41 (95% CI 0.60-3.27). Estimated (e)GFR was predicted by pre-transplant weight, donor age and recipient race; and assessed at baseline; at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post-transplantation; and annually thereafter. Dialysis modality prior to transplantation did not influence the level of eGFR post-transplantation (p = 0.34), nor the rate of eGFR decline. Post-transplant hemoglobin was also not affected by pre-transplant dialysis modality (p = 0.12). Post-transplant systolic blood pressure was 4.8 mmHg lower in the CHD group (p = 0.04), though these patients were receiving signifi

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDialysis and Renal Disease Management→French-language works237,207→